On Oct 18, 2011, at 3:49 AM, Ric Eittreim wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 6260
> Logged by: Ric Eittreim
> Email address: r...@groundtruth.com
> PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
> Operating system: Mac LION
> Description:not accept p
On 10/15/2011 11:21 AM, stephen wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6255
Logged by: stephen
Email address: snpmons...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
Operating system: Windows 7
Description:Unable to Install (Binary, One Click Install
"Stan S" writes:
> shard_1=# CREATE TABLE users (nickname CITEXT PRIMARY KEY,pass TEXT NOT
> NULL);
> NOTICE: CREATE TABLE / PRIMARY KEY will create implicit index "users_pkey"
> for table "users"
> shard_1=# INSERT INTO users VALUES ( 'larry', 'aaa' );
> INSERT 0 1
> shard_1=# INSERT INTO u
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6260
Logged by: Ric Eittreim
Email address: r...@groundtruth.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
Operating system: Mac LION
Description:not accept password
Details:
I just installed Postgres for the first time to le
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6259
Logged by: Stan S
Email address: ssanti...@adinfocenter.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
Operating system: CentOS release 5.4 (Final)
Description:Collation Error with Citext fields
Details:
Greetings, I'm en
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> There really is not any way to generate guaranteed-hole-free sequences
> using sequence objects. If you have to have that, I'd suggest locking
> the table against other writes and then fetching MAX(id) + 1. It's not
> very fast, and it's not a
Laerson keler writes:
> 2011/10/17 Tom Lane
>> "Laerson Keler" writes:
>> Why did you do that, that is what were you trying to accomplish? It
>> never did block nextval() on the sequence, for example.
> Tom Lane, good afternoon, I block the sequence not to miss the sequel, for
> it not to be s
On 17-10-2011 12:52, Tom Lane wrote:
"Laerson Keler" writes:
Dear Srs, good morning, I did the automatic update postgresql 8.4.9 and
a function stopped working, I used the option select for update
in a sequence and is now giving the following error "can not lock rows in
sequence ...", how can I
Tom Lane, good afternoon, I block the sequence not to miss the sequel, for
it not to be skipped if the insert to fail. My logic involves two triggers,
one before and one after. I give the first one in last_value select for
update in the sequence and insert after I run a select next_val ('sequence')
"Laerson Keler" writes:
> Dear Srs, good morning, I did the automatic update postgresql 8.4.9 and
> a function stopped working, I used the option select for update
> in a sequence and is now giving the following error "can not lock rows in
> sequence ...", how can I enable the blocking of the sequ
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6258
Logged by: Laerson Keler
Email address: laerson.ke...@lkmc.com.br
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.9
Operating system: Ubuntu 10.04 - Kernel 2.6.32-34
Description:Lock Sequence
Details:
Dear Srs, good morning, I d
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6257
Logged by: Laerson Keler
Email address: laerson.ke...@lkmc.com.br
PostgreSQL version: 8.4.9
Operating system: Ubuntu 10.04 - Kernel 2.6.32-34
Description:Lock Sequence
Details:
Caros Srs, bom dia, fiz a a
On Oct 17, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Andreas Pflug wrote:
> Am 17.10.11 10:53, schrieb Thomas Kellerer:
>> Susanne Ebrecht, 17.10.2011 09:31:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I couldn't find that somebody already mentioned it.
>>>
>>> PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
>>>
>>> An empty string has a length of 0.
>
On 10/17/11 7:41 AM, Andreas Pflug wrote:
Sounds much too straight forward, not mysql-ish autistic enough...
I fixed your spelling. HTH!
--
john r pierceN 37, W 122
santa cruz ca mid-left coast
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-
Am 17.10.11 10:53, schrieb Thomas Kellerer:
> Susanne Ebrecht, 17.10.2011 09:31:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I couldn't find that somebody already mentioned it.
>>
>> PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
>>
>> An empty string has a length of 0.
>>
>> CHAR(0) can have two values: NULL and empty string.
>>
>> In
Hello,
On 17.10.2011 15:44, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
2011-10-17 14:28 keltezéssel, Susanne Ebrecht írta:
On 17.10.2011 10:30, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Susanne Ebrecht
wrote:
PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
What does the SQL Standard say?
Document: 02-Fou
2011-10-17 14:28 keltezéssel, Susanne Ebrecht írta:
On 17.10.2011 10:30, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Susanne Ebrecht
wrote:
PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
What does the SQL Standard say?
Document: 02-Foundation
Section: 4.2.1 Introduction to character string
On 17.10.2011 10:30, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Susanne Ebrecht
wrote:
PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
What does the SQL Standard say?
Document: 02-Foundation
Section: 4.2.1 Introduction to character strings
Begin quoting
A character string is a sequence of
Susanne Ebrecht, 17.10.2011 09:31:
Hello,
I couldn't find that somebody already mentioned it.
PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
An empty string has a length of 0.
CHAR(0) can have two values: NULL and empty string.
In MySQL it is very common to simulate not null boolean
by using CHAR(0).
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Susanne Ebrecht
wrote:
> PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
What does the SQL Standard say?
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-b
On Oct 17, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Susanne Ebrecht wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I couldn't find that somebody already mentioned it.
>
> PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
>
> An empty string has a length of 0.
>
> CHAR(0) can have two values: NULL and empty string.
>
> In MySQL it is very common to simula
Hello,
I couldn't find that somebody already mentioned it.
PostgreSQL isn't supporting CHAR(0).
An empty string has a length of 0.
CHAR(0) can have two values: NULL and empty string.
In MySQL it is very common to simulate not null boolean
by using CHAR(0).
This is a little bit annoying on mi
On Oct 15, 2011, at 8:51 AM, stephen wrote:
>
> The following bug has been logged online:
>
> Bug reference: 6255
> Logged by: stephen
> Email address: snpmons...@gmail.com
> PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
> Operating system: Windows 7
> Description:Unable to Install (Bi
23 matches
Mail list logo